Guest View: Fishing industry needs research money as well as disaster relief

Rep. Antonio F.D. Cabral

Sunday

Nov 18, 2012 at 9:35 AM

The elections may be over, but the current Congress still has work to do.

The elections may be over, but the current Congress still has work to do.

On Sept. 13, 2012, acting U.S. Secretary of Commerce Rebecca Blank declared the Northeast's groundfish industry a federal disaster, opening the door for Congress to allocate funds for fishery disaster aid. Of course, any disaster relief should first address the needs of fishermen and their families. But the package currently being negotiated should also include funds to reinvigorate scientific research, which is essential to maximizing the economic benefits of tomorrow's fishing industry.

The fishing industry is important for Massachusetts, generating billions in economic activity annually. In New Bedford, the number one fishing port by value of catch in the United States and home to several major processors, the stakes are especially high. But the industry has been hurting for years and efforts to maximize productivity have been hampered by a lack of reliable scientific data.

We need reliable, independent science. And Massachusetts is best equipped to provide it.

When the federal government first began regulating America's coastal fisheries in 1976, with the passage of the predecessor to today's Magnuson-Stevens Act, the law was hailed for basing future fishing decisions on hard science. Scientific data, would inform the decisions of the regional fishing councils the law created, allowing the councils to carefully balance the interests of environmentalists and those of fishermen and their communities. Unfortunately, there was little scientific research about fishing available at the time, other than attempts to count how many of each species fishermen were landing. While Magnuson-Stevens has been amended several times in the intervening 36 years, most recently in 2007, scientific research that can help our fishing industry maximize opportunities remains limited.

That's because there has not been adequate, sustained funding for independent research centers. At times of crisis, regulators and industry players search frantically for data. When the crisis passes, research dollars disappear. The most consistent research occurs at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)'s own National Marine Fisheries Service research facilities. But NOAA's research, which attempts to estimate the number of a particular species of fish in hundreds of square miles of ocean at a given time, yields broad ranges and approximations. In addition, thanks to years of mistrust between NOAA and the industry it regulates, NOAA's data is increasingly questioned by many in the industry. Determining the number, type and location of fish, their ability to replenish themselves and their interaction with other undersea life has proven unexpectedly difficult. Add the effects of global warming and other environmental changes, and NOAA faces an impossible task: to balance the interests of fish and fishermen in a rapidly changing environment using scientific evidence that is, by its own scientists' admission, often unspecific, unproven and unreliable. NOAA has been put in the position of acting not only as judge and jury, but as prosecution, defense and expert witness.

In 2008, NOAA researchers estimated that Gulf of Maine cod were quickly recovering from previous overfishing. Then in 2011, researchers estimated instead that the stock was only one third of the size of the previous estimate. Based on the latest research, NOAA is preparing to cut already low cod catch limits by as much 70 percent next year. Yellowtail flounder is facing additional cuts after an 80 percent reduction last year. And scallops, often New Bedford's most valuable catch, could be cut by as much as 30 percent.

Our marine environment and our fishermen face unprecedented challenges. If we have any hope of building the kind of consensus and broad trust that will be necessary to move forward, we must relieve NOAA of the burden of playing all of those roles.

I am urging Senator Kerry, Senator Brown and Congressman Frank to use the opportunity presented by federal disaster relief legislation to strengthen independent centers of marine science expertise. Only with significant investment and the collaboration of outside experts can we hope to build trust in increasingly critical, but increasingly complicated, scientific data.

Fortunately, Massachusetts, particularly New Bedford, already has the foundations for such independent centers of maritime science. Federal dollars should flow to these institutions.

In 2002 the University of Massachusetts joined with the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, the state agency charged with managing marine resources, to establish the Marine Fisheries Institute, an organization dedicated to becoming a national leader for innovative and practical fisheries management, but the Institute has atrophied for lack of funding. With the latest warnings from regulators, the Commonwealth is considering new investments in these institutions. Now is the time for the federal government, the dominant player in fisheries research and regulation, to step up.

In particular, the School for Marine Science and Technology (SMAST) at UMass Dartmouth is uniquely suited to provide this research. SMAST has an ideal location as well as a history of fostering positive collaboration between all fishing stakeholders.

SMAST can also boast a proven record of success in fishery research. In the 1990s the scallop industry was on the verge of collapse when SMAST pioneered new research on a very tight budget that proved the scallop population wasn't devastated, allowing previously closed areas to be reopened. For ten years, the New England Fishery Management Council used SMAST data along with data from NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service, to set annual catch limits for scallops. Today the scallop fishery is one of the most valuable in the United States.

I also urge the Massachusetts delegation to work to secure the majority of any disaster aid for the Commonwealth. Seventy percent of all groundfish in New England is landed in Massachusetts, so if Congress passes a $100 million aid package, $70 million should be spent to assist fishermen in Massachusetts through both research and aid.

I will continue to work for investments from the Commonwealth as well. In this year's state budget, I successfully secured $200,000 for SMAST to conduct species count analysis on groundfish and scallops, with $50,000 specifically set aside for research of Gulf of Maine cod. Six months earlier, the Commonwealth appropriated over $1.1 million for further groundfish research, which remains unspent pending a decision on the best research approach. I have been working with my colleagues in the State House, as well as House leadership, to secure these funds for yellowtail research, which could help both groundfish and scallop fishermen.

By fostering improved, independent research, we can create jobs in New Bedford and strengthen our position as a world leader in marine science. As our oceans change, we can sustain marine life and marine industry only with substantially improved knowledge of the fishing grounds.

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.